perl 6 normally works in terms of "graphemes" (things that *look* like a character). some of these require combining codepoints, so a single Perl 6 "character" may be represented by more than one codepoint

generally, yes. but RGB332 means 3 bits for the red channel, 3 for green, 2 for blue. usually you want to use 24 or 32 bit color so you get 0-255 for each color channel (and optionally 0-255 for transparency)

https://github.com/raydiak/pray - if you want to, you can take inspiration from Pray, another perl6 ray tracer. it's not been touched in a long time, though, so might not work right away without some minor changes

there is one other cleverness in there, the space before the .flatmap makes flatmap method be called on the Range object produced by ^256 instead of on 256. (I'm not actually fond of that particular precedence hack.)

player: because `:s` makes whitespace significant, not literal. The whitespace after atoms in regex becomes a <.ws> call that can match a bunch of whitespace. It's like using `rule` instead of `token` inside grammars.

for you because you missed the parentheses. And as others mentioned, you can use `:` instead of parentheses for trailing method calls and just write `$*ERR.say: 1, 2, 3`. (or just `note 1, 2, 3`, since it uses $*ERR under the hood)

as I see it, Perl 6 can pull off being a "new" language, historical Perl can. Also Perl 5 can benefit from the positive Perl association (backwards compatible, installed everywhere, ducktape), while Perl 6 does not (and is damaged by the undeserved bad rep that some people have of perl 5)

Just a random thought. I'm still trying to work out why there's so many Perl devs who are so angry about it. I mean I was working with 5.6 in my first job (so I didn't have to go through the 4 -> 5 release) but I've been working with perl for years now.

(As I say, I've been coding in Perl for 15+ years, and I've been having the arguments with management for much of the later time. It's not Perl6 that have hit Perl5's popularity it's node and Java nad python (not in that order)

I guess because I've basically spent a lot of time not involved in this, I don't have the scars from the earleir attempts (I tried to get involved a few times but could never get my head around how to run it) I am still optimistic.

Like I say, I'm an optimist. This is the first time in years I've really felt like I've found a language that works with my brain (which possibly says something about my brain) I've always liked Perl5 but I've possibly spent too much time dealing with scary scary scary codebases.

just read some of the back log... anyone who's livlihood is so fragile that Perl 5 not being selected by managers utterly affects their ability to live, need to *strongly* reconsider how they are thinking about their career as a programmer regardless of the status of Perl

the period of time that P5 had a super strong hold on large scale commerical products was almost twenty years past and it was a short period of time.... its not like Perl ever had Java or C level usage and commercial mindset

El_Che: the "high road"? As far as I'm concerned we're still on schedule to create a marketing alias for the name with 6.d release, as was always planned. People who yell the loudest about naming discussions being pointless and renames unachievable expect everything to change overnight, as soon as Proposal Name #13232 is announced by someone.

El_Che: it does help. It's an opportunity for the renamers camp to prove the current name is as detrimental and the new name is as beneficial as they claim. If the hypothesis is true, the alias will naturally become the One True Name for the language through its mere use.

El_Che: I don't believe the existence of Perl 6 is Perl 5's biggest problem. There's a reason Perl 6 was started in the first place. They're now trying to implement more and more of Perl 6's features (signatures, smartmatch, `when` semantics) but without causing incompatibility breakage that Perl 6 accepted as inevitable and their users are freaking out (

El_Che: I might be happy if they rename to Perl 7, yeah. It'd give the Perl 6's language alias more desirability. But it'd be totally stupid for Perl 5 to be renamed to Perl 7 **right now** as they don't have anything nice to offer to justify a major release.

as someone who has used perl 5 a lot and who isn't heavily invested in either language, I see that p5 has kept many of its quirks (syntactical and otherwise) and languages in the same genre have left theirs behind (and many new languages have appeared)... and if anything has caused a decline in p5's popularity, it's probably that

i.e. if I use a module that hasn't been updated for latest smartmatch changes, `use v5` will crap out on it and I have no options left. With Inline::Perl5, I can just lock my application to a specific version of Perl 5

And another point to it: we currently do have a portion of what you propose implemented: :P5 regex modifier. It's poorly tested, buggy, and last I saw seemed to miss some features going back as far as 5.10. Considering this small part of the language doesn't have enough maintainers, is it reasonable a slang for the entire language has more viability?

[backlogging] As for re-branding, either both projects should re-brand at the exact same time or they should keep the identities they have and push forward together. I'm tired of seeing the bickering happen between my two favorite languages.

er, only one is here i think...anyhow, i created some things for my daughter’s wedding in raw postscript such as the wedding service program and a souvenir postcard. i will be happy to share the PS files which can easily be modified to suit the upcoming event.

doc site question: we have some stuff we manage with 'make' and some stuff we manage inside of the giant htmlify; What's the current thought on going all-make vs. all p6? (I tend to prefer Make because it's a common, shared, horrible thing which I already understand, but I get that this is a great project for us to eat our own dogfood.

Is there a built in way to read from a Buf while advancing a pointer through it? Eg. I want to read 20 bytes from a Buf, and then the next time I want to read 4 bytes starting from where I left off at byte 20 and so on. The closest I can find is .subbuf and then keeping track of $from manually.

31 Dec 2017 12:47 MST <TimToady> ryn1x: we don't do Lisp-style cons lists by default because the head/tail model is bad for parallel processing of lists, so we keep them at a higher abstraction level; however, you can make tail-sharing lists if you like by using => for cons (it's even right associative for that reason)

lizmat: I've been meaning to ask you if you ever recieved the thank you post card I sent? I very thankful for the stuffed Camelia, books, stickers, and pins you sent me a while back! I am now using Perl6 everyday at work (at a US National Laboratory) and as a part time CS student.

well, M-x tutorial is very good for basic hotkeys, but it doesn't cover a lot of things. The blog post which link I've posted here covers package management, basic configuration and explain things like buffers, modes, etc.

comborico1611, about books: I dunno, to be honest. It was not yesterday as I started with it, but from what I can recall: default emacs tutorial + some articles(I think the one I posted is good enough). Then goes some googling like "How to make your emacs shine". And a lot of time to discover "must have" plugins, installing it, etc.